Between 1977 and 2010 only 63 people had their citizenship revoked. In July, 2011, Jason Kenney, then the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (“Minister Kenney“), announced that as many as 1,800 Canadians could be stripped of their citizenship because they obtained their citizenship fraudulently. The 1,800 individuals were identified following a three-year investigation by the RCMP, other police forces and Citizenship and Immigration Canada. On September 9, 2012, Minister Kenney announced that the number of people who would likely have their citizenship revoked had risen to 3,100, with an additional 11,000 people under investigation. An Access to Information Act request revealed that most of the Canadian citizens who were the subject of investigations were originally from the following countries. By the end of 2012, the process of revoking these peoples’ citizenship had already begun. Ultimately, after Federal Court litigation and a change in government, citizenship revocations continue at a rate much smaller than it seemed would occur, but more than before. In 2021, 7 people had their citizenship revoked. In 2022, it was 25. Section 10 of the Citizenship Act The authority of the Government of Canada to strip people of their citizenship is legally provided for by s. 10 of the … Read More
Labour Market Impact Assessments- Prevailing Wage
In order to obtain a positive Labour Market Impact Assessments, an employer must commit to paying a prospective foreign worker at least the prevailing wage for an occupation in a geographic area. The prevailing wage is set by Employment and Skills Development Canada (“ESDC“)/Service Canada. It is a very strict requirement, and Service Canada officers currently have no discretion to vary it.
Misrepresentations and H&C
Several large scale immigration frauds in recent years have resulted in thousands of permanent residents facing removal of Canada for misrepresentation. Many are filing appeals based on humanitarian & compassionate considerations. In assessing such appeals, both the Canada Border Services Agency, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada and the Immigration Appeal Division face the task of weighing an individual’s previous misconduct against the compassionate mitigating factors which may exist. To quote Justice Russel in Yu v. Canada, 2017 FC 10-88 the decision in Dowers v Canada (Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, 2017 FC 593 at paragraphs 2 to 6, stresses the point that concern about the past must be separated from concern about the future: A situation such as the Applicant’s, where a person comes to Canada and stays without adhering to the immigration laws, but, nevertheless, succeeds to be a positive, productive, and valuable member of society must be given careful attention. Section 25 has no purpose if that person is easily condemned for her or his immigration history. The history must be viewed as a fact which is to be taken into consideration, but within a serious holistic and empathetic exploration of the totality of the evidence, to discover whether … Read More
Misrepresentation
Section 40 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act provides that a permanent resident or foreign national is inadmissible to Canada for directly or indirectly misrepresenting or withholding a material fact relating to a relevant matter that induces or could induce an error in the administration of Canada’s immigration laws. The general consequence of misrepresenting is a five-year ban from entering Canada. Canada is very strict on misrepresentation. In Bundhel v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2014 FC 1147, for example, Mr. Bundhel had been charged and convicted with an offence, which had been overturned on appeal. Mr. Bundhel would accordingly not have been criminally inadmissible to Canada. Because of this, he put on his immigration forms that he had never been charged or arrested. When it discovered thathehad been previously charged, what is now Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada wrote to him and provided him with an opportunity to explain why he misrepresented. After the immigration officer reviewed Mr. Bundhel’s explanation that it was an innocent mistake, the officer refused the application, and declared the person inadmissible to Canada for misrepresentation. The Court wrote (citations removed): Mr. Bundhel’s complaint that the Officer should have considered the fact that he owned-up to the … Read More
Borderlines Podcast #195 – 2026 Predictions for Canadian Immigration Law
The first Borderlines episode of 2026 is our annual recap + predictions roundtable with Ottawa immigration lawyer Tamara Mosher-Kuczer. We look back at what actually happened in 2025, what surprised us most, and what 2026 might bring. Timestamps / Chapters 0:52 Looking back: how many predictions were right last year? 14:40 2026 predictions 39:46 Listener question: What will happen with caregivers? 42:28 Listener prediction: Turning asylum into a temporary pathway 46:11 Listener question: Trades vs. Francophones 52:12 Listner question: LMIA exemptions / significant benefit work permits—any expansion? 57:56 Will Canada’s population increase or decrease in 2026? Subscribe for weekly immigration law breakdowns and policy updates, and tell us: What’s your boldest 2026 immigration prediction?
H&C Applications
The following is the IRCC Manual on H&C applications.
Study Permit Compliance
In 2020, over 400,000 international students at the post-secondary level in Canada will return to school. Many will want to stay and work in Canada after graduating. All will be subject to mandatory conditions of their stay as a student in Canada. It is important for all international students, and especially those who wish to one day work in or immigrate to Canada, to understand these conditions, as the consequence of failing to comply with one of the them is removal from Canada and a one year bar from returning. The Law on Study Permit Compliance Regulation 220.1(1) of Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations provides that the holder of a study permit in Canada must enroll at a post-secondary institution that accepts international students, also known as a designated learning institution, and remain enrolled at the designated learning institution until they complete their studies. As well, students must actively pursue their course or program of study. Canadian immigration authorities typically interpret this legislative requirement as being that students must be enrolled full-time or part-time during each academic semester (excluding regularly scheduled breaks), that they must make progress towards completing their program’s courses and that they cannot take authorized leaves … Read More
Assessing the Genuineness and Primary Purpose of a Marriage
Regulation 4 of Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, SOR/2002-207 state that a foreign national shall not be considered a spouse, a common-law partner or a conjugal partner of a person if the marriage, common-law partnership or conjugal partnership (a) was entered into primarily for the purpose of acquiring any status or privilege under the Act or (b) is not genuine. Statistics From 2012-2017 around 4% of spousal sponsorship applications were refused because an officer determined that an applicant’s marriage was either not genuine or that it was primarily motivated by an immigration benefit. A Hasty Marriage In Nadasapillai v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2015 FC 72, Justice Diner held that the fact that a marriage was entered into after a short courtship is not determinative of a mala fide marriage. He stated: The Panel criticized the haste based on Ms. Raman’s troubled past relationship and marriage, and the fact that Ms. Raman was 38 years of age at the time, i.e., getting on in age for a single mother. There are two reasons that this is a weak conclusion. First, one can easily understand why Ms. Raman was ready for the companionship that she clearly explained she had longed for: older couples can be quick in deciding … Read More